[Development] proposing Richard Moore as approver

[João Abecasis]

On Nov 2, 2011, at 11:52 AM, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On Wednesday, 2 de November de 2011 11:14:47 Olivier Goffart wrote:
>> On Tuesday 01 November 2011 16:00:30 Peter Hartmann wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>> 
>>> hereby I would like to propose Richard Moore as approver for the Qt
>>> project.
>>> 
>>> Rich has made numerous high-quality commits to the Qt SSL code and knows
>>> Qt very well, being a KDE contributor since the very beginning.
>>> 
>>> Shane Kearns and Martin Petersson second this proposal.
>>> 
>>> Please raise any concerns you might have about this until 22nd of
>>> November 2011 (see the guide lines at
>>> http://wiki.qt-project.org/The_Qt_Governance_Model#How_to_become_an_Approv
>>> er ).
>> 
>> I know it is not needed, but I also recommand Richard as an approver.
>> 
>> But am I alone to think that 3 weeks of waiting time is a lot?
>> 15 work day is a lot,  how about reducing it to something between 7 and 10
>> work days?
> 
> I think the number was chosen so that people who might be on vacations have 
> the time to react. But I agree it's a bit high.

On the other hand, maintainers and approvers who vouch for proposed approvers can already Rubber-Stamp their review recommendations in gerrit without doing the review themselves. In practice, that's what being and approver means: others trust your review decisions.

Given that we all hope and expect Qt, its approvers and maintainers to be active for a long while is the waiting time such and impediment?

(For the record, I'm not opposed to reducing the waiting time for approvers)

Cheers,


João